Simultaneous or Delayed Placement of Surface Modified and Fluoridated Dental Implants into Autogenous Block Bone Grafts: A Histologic and Biomechanical Study in the Rabbit

Vertical bone augmentation with simultaneous implantation using deproteinized bovine bone block functionalized with a slow delivery of BMP-2

OBJECTIVE

We hypothesized that a biomimetic calcium phosphate (CaP) coating which incorporates morphogenetic protein 2 (BMP-2) on the deproteinized bovine bone (DBB) blocks could be used to enhance the vertical alveolar ridge augmentation for the one-stage onlay surgery with simultaneous implants insertion. We aimed to test this hypothesis in vivo.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Beagles dogs were used for the study (n = 6 specimens per group). One month after building the edentulous animal model, 4 mm vertical alveolar bone loss were surgically created and four groups of blocks (W × L × H: 7 mm × 10 mm × 4 mm) were randomly fixed onto the reduced alveolar ridge by implants: (a) DBB blocks alone (negative control group); (b) DBB blocks with superficial adsorption of 50 μg BMP-2 (ad.BMP-2 group); (c) DBB blocks coated by biomimetic CaP coating which incorporates 50 μg BMP-2 (inc.BMP-2 group); and (d) autologous bone blocks (positive control group). After 3 months of healing, samples were harvested for micro-CT and histomorphometric analyses.

RESULTS

In histomorphometry, the inc.BMP-2 group showed a significantly thicker (coronal-apically) and wider (buccal-lingually) augmented bone area, better bone-to-implant contact than the negative control group. In both the micro-CT and histomorphometry, the inc.BMP-2 group showed more mineralized tissue than the negative control group and the inc.BMP-2 group also showed significantly more newly formed bone and residual grafts than the negative control group in the upper half of the blocks. In micro-CT, the inc.BMP-2 group showed significantly more bone-to-graft contact percentage than the ad.BMP-2 group. In both micro-CT and histomorphometry, the inc.BMP-2 group showed significantly more percentage of mineralized tissue than the ad.BMP-2 group. No significant differences were found between the inc.BMP-2 group and the positive control group either in micro-CT or in histomorphometry.

CONCLUSIONS

The DBB blocks with coating-delivered BMP-2 significantly enhanced the efficacy of vertical alveolar bone augmentation, compared with the unloaded blocks and blocks with adsorbed BMP-2, in the one-stage onlay surgery with simultaneous implant insertion.

Single-staged implant placement using the bone ring technique with and without membrane placement: Micro-CT analysis in a preclinical in vivo study

OBJECTIVES

To assess the impact of collagen membrane application on bone formation surrounding implants placed simultaneously with the bone ring technique.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Dental implants were inserted simultaneously with the bone ring technique in standardized, vertical alveolar bony defects in the mandible of dogs. On one side of the mandible, the augmented sites were covered with a collagen membrane (M-Group). On the contralateral side, no membranes were used (NM-Group). Implants were left to heal with osseointegration for three and six months. The harvested samples were analyzed by means of micro-CT.

RESULTS

A nonparametric analysis of data revealed that the membranes were not a significant negative factor for bone volume (BV), but for bone-to-implant contact (BIC, p = .04). Absence of healing caps impaired BV (p = .04) and BIC (p = .02) as well. Furthermore, loss of healing caps and exposure to the oral environment significantly and negatively affected BV (p < .001) and bone mineral density (p < .05) within 2 mm below the implant shoulder. Implant exposure and healing time had a negative interaction effect on both BV (p = .01) and BIC (p = .01).

CONCLUSIONS

Within its limitations, the present study revealed no benefit of membrane application to implant placement simultaneous with the bone ring technique. Disruption of soft tissue healing was identified as a risk factor for decrease in BV and BIC.

Do short implants have similar survival rates compared to standard implants in posterior single crown?: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Short implants have been presented as an option for posterior rehabilitation in cases of poor bone height.

PURPOSE

To compare the survival rate of short implants and standard implants when used in posterior single crowns, in addition to reporting marginal bone loss, prosthetic failures, and surgical complications.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Electronic search (PubMed, LILACS, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Web of Science) and hand search were performed to identify all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs) that evaluated both short and standard implants in posterior single crowns.

RESULTS

Out of 345 articles identified by both electronic and hand search, four studies were selected (one CCT and three RCTs). The meta-analysis for the survival rate showed that there was no significant difference between the short implants and the standard ones (P = 1.00; RR:1.00; CI:0.97-1.03) performed with three RCTs for a one-year follow-up. The mean marginal bone loss ranged from 0.1 mm to 0.54 mm. Only one study reported the presence of prosthetic failures and surgical complications.

CONCLUSIONS

The survival rate of short implants was similar to the standard ones in posterior single crowns, for the one-year follow-up period. They also presented low surgical complications, prosthetic failures and marginal bone loss, being a predictable treatment for single rehabilitation in posterior tooth loss.

Single-staged implant placement using bone ring technique with and without membrane placement: An experimental study in the Beagle dog

AIM

To evaluate the impact of a collagen membrane on bone remodeling and osseointegration of implants placed simultaneously with a bone ring technique.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Standardized, vertical alveolar bone defects in the mandibles of six dogs were created. Tapered dental implants designed for two-stage subcrestal placement were inserted simultaneously with a bone ring technique. On one side of the mandible, the augmented sites were covered with a collagenous membrane. Implants with (M Group) and without membranes (NM Group) were left for an osseointegration period of 3 and 6 months, respectively. Block biopsies of the implants with surrounding bone were harvested and analyzed histologically.

RESULTS

Implant exposure was a common finding (2/3) concomitantly with loss of healing caps. It appeared to be related to advanced bone loss around the implants. Exposure of implants was more frequent in M Group, however, without significant differences when compared to NM Group. The total bone area within the region of the bone ring was greater in the NM Group compared to the M Group. Moreover, in the region of the pristine bone of the M Group, the total bone was greater than at the corresponding NM Group sites at both observation periods. A nonparametric analysis of variance (ANOVA) revealed no significant effects of membrane placement or healing period on the total area of the bone. The total bone-to-implant contact (BIC) for the two groups was similar at each observation time point. However, BIC increased significantly at 6-month compared with 3-month observation period (p = .0088) in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In vertical bone augmentation applying the bone ring technique, the disruption of soft tissue was a frequent complication. Membrane placement yielded no significant advantage on the osseointegration (BIC) of implants or bone characteristics.

Single-staged vs. two-staged implant placement in vertically deficient alveolar ridges using bone ring technique - Part 2: implant osseointegration

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to evaluate the osseointegration of implants placed in a single-staged compared to two-staged procedure using bone ring technique.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In this study were used standardized, vertical alveolar bone defects in dogs. In the test group, dental implants (Straumann BL^® , Basel, Switzerland) were inserted simultaneously with bone ring technique. As control group served implants inserted 6 months following grafting. Implants of both groups were left for an osseointegration period of 3 and 6 months. The peri-implant bone loss and bone-to-implant contact within the bone ring and native bone were analyzed morphometrically. An explorative statistical analysis was performed.

RESULTS

The peri-implant bone level remained relatively stable within groups and between groups per given time period. Most of bone apposite on the implant surface in two groups was composed of newly formed bone. A nonparametric analysis of variance (ANOVA) revealed no significant advantage for two-staged implant placement for new and total bone, except for residual bone (P = .0084). Furthermore, two groups of implants performed similarly in bone ring and in native bone throughout the observation period.

CONCLUSIONS

In terms of osseointegration, both techniques are likely equally efficient in the present defect model. The single-staged implant placement with cortical bone grafts warrants further documentation in clinical studies.